Re: [Mod-pubsub-developer] Java client update/rewrite

[Robert L. <ro...@le...>]

At 04:30 PM 18/03/2004, Asynch Messaging wrote:

>I'm interested in following the development & helping.

Great!

>I think following the protocol specification is a better route - that avoids
>accidental coupling with other client stacks & also may help expose
>ambiguously documented features.

Sounds like a good plan. I was looking to use the python code as the 
arbiter of what is and is not supported in the protocol, mainly because my 
memory is bad and I had this recollection that the protocol doco was a 
little lacking - apologies if my memory casts any dispersions :-)


>Why does the java client need to be re-written?
>Are there pieces that just don't work at all? Is it a stylistic thing?
>It's been a few months since I looked at the source, but I thought it was
>working okay.

There are a number of areas where it doesn't meet the 'standard' protocol 
requirements, which causes some problems. I also wanted to bring it more 
into line with the other libraries, in particular, python as I am most 
familiar with it, in terms of class names, features, etc (but looking to 
the others more closely there is not that much similarity in class names 
and structure anyway), so that may not be as high a priority. I'm also very 
keen to do it in a 'test driven design'  way as much as possible (as I'm 
somewhat test infected) and this will likely lead to a different end result 
in any case.

Robert